ILNews

Opinions May 24, 2011

May 24, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted on opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
S.W. by P.W. v. B.K.
71A03-1012-PO-655
Protective order. Reverses trial court’s denial of S.W.’s motion to correct error, remands for a hearing on civil contempt petition, and orders S.W. to be reimbursed $250 appellate filing fee. Held that Indiana code states filing fees will not be assessed for a proceeding seeking relief from or enforcement of a civil protective order.

Paternity of A.S.; B.S. v. E.M.
82A01-1006-JP-291
Juvenile paternity. Affirms trial court’s award of primary custody to mother and remands to trial court for determination of how and when the father may make-up lost parenting time.

Wastewater One, et al. v. Floyd County Board of Zoning Appeals, et al.

22A04-1007-PL-418
Civil plenary. Affirms the trial court’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment affirming the Board of Zoning Appeals’ denial of the applicant’s conditional use of application for expansion of a sewage treatment plant.

Harold E. York v. State of Indiana
27A02-1008-CR-956
Criminal. Dismisses Harold York’s interlocutory appeal previously granted by the Court of Appeals, in anticipation of the defendant claiming the trial court should have granted his motion to dismiss the charge of Failure to Register as a Sex Offender, a Class D felony. In its decision to dismiss, the appeals court held that the state did not allege York had failed to register under the lifetime requirement, but that he violated the Registration Act by failing to include his fiancee’s house as his residence.  

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.K.; C.W. v. IDCS (NFP)
42A04-1010-JT-699
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Christian D. Howard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1010-CR-656
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s revocation of probation and decision to allow hearsay testimony.
 
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions by IL deadline.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. My daughters' kids was removed from the home in March 2015, she has been in total compliance with the requirements of cps, she is going to court on the 4th of August. Cps had called the first team meeting last Monday to inform her that she was not in compliance, by not attending home based therapy, which is done normally with the children in the home, and now they are recommending her to have a psych evaluation, and they are also recommending that the children not be returned to the home. This is all bull hockey. In this so called team meeting which I did attend for the best interest of my child and grandbabies, I learned that no matter how much she does that cps is not trying to return the children and the concerns my daughter has is not important to cps, they only told her that she is to do as they say and not to resist or her rights will be terminated. I cant not believe the way Cps treats people knowing if they threaten you with loosing your kids you will do anything to get them back. My daughter is drug free she has never put her hands on any of her children she does not scream at her babies at all, but she is only allowed to see her kids 6 hours a week and someone has to supervise. Lets all tske a stand against the child protection services. THEY CAN NO LONGER TAKE CHILDREN FROM THERE PARENTS.

  2. Planned Parenthood has the government so trained . . .

  3. In a related story, an undercover video team released this footage of the government's search of the Planned Parenthood facilities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXVN7QJ8m88

  4. Here is an excellent movie for those wanting some historical context, as well as encouragement to stand against dominant political forces and knaves who carry the staves of governance to enforce said dominance: http://www.copperheadthemovie.com/

  5. Not enough copperheads here to care anymore, is my guess. Otherwise, a totally pointless gesture. ... Oh wait: was this done because somebody want to avoid bad press - or was it that some weak kneed officials cravenly fear "protest" violence by "urban youths.."

ADVERTISEMENT